A Typical Tragedy from an Exploitive Society

Through the dominant practices of our civilized culture we have lost all that is real.  As a group of peoples living on a piece of land known to us as the United States, we are foreign to everything wild and natural and honest.  We do not know what it means to live in community and we do not know what it means to live honestly and in harmony with the beings that surround us.  As a society we have killed or manipulated all that is wild.  Our dominant culture has inflicted its catastrophic ignorance for the generations that follow to endure.  With that said, America’s relationship with the bee should be of absolutely no surprise.

The bee and the flowering plant evolved together over 100 million years ago.  Living together in undisturbed mutual symbiosis they have provided each other with a service that neither can live without.  The flower is the bee’s source of food and the bee is the means by which flowers are fertilized.  When the bee gathers nectar from a flower he also unintentionally gathers pollen on his furry body.  As the bee flies to his next flower to gather more nectar, some of the pollen on his fur rubs off on the new flower and thus pollinating the plant.  This natural cycle is responsible for the fertilization of over 16% of all plant species in the world.  And in the United States’ industrialized agricultural system, the bee is responsible for the pollination of 100 of our most important crops, contributing to approximately one third of all food produced in America.  The bee has an incredibly large impact on life on Earth.  Some scientists even hypothesize that if the evolution of the bee had not occurred, the human species would not be in existence today.  It would be assumed that the human species would value the life of the bee and the incredible services with which they provide us with, however, that is simply not the case.  The bee currently faces a devastating crisis that is, not alarmingly, human invoked.

The bee is an invasive species to the United States and first arrived from England in the 1600s.  Through the Honey Bees production of beeswax and honey, though, the bee quickly made its way into American history.  Today, there are approximately 3,500 be species found in the United States and about 20,000 species worldwide.  The Honey Bee is, perhaps, the species that the United States relies on most heavily.  For it is this insect that has helped American agriculture become the mass industry that it is.  Today, pollination services are at the grounds of this advance and rely completely on the work of the Honey Bee.  The pollinating industry is dominated by a handful of commercial bee truckers who haul enormous quantities of bees across the nation to various agriculture sites to pollinate crops for seed production.  However, this service has entered a crisis as bee populations are disappearing rapidly.  Honey Bees have been dying off for approximately 20-30 years now.  In the 1980s the Honey Bee Tracheal Mite population killed off about half of all Honey Bees in the United States.  And after control was gained over that epidemic with the use of harsh chemicals, bee populations were predicted to be back to a fairly normal state.  However, beginning again in 2007 Honey Bee populations have been on the vast decline.  From year 2007 to 2009 approximately ninety percent of hives have died from what is known as Colony Collapse Disorder.  A situation in which the bees know that they are ill and instead of returning to their hives to infect the rest of their family, they fly away to die.  Pesticides use is believed to be a contributing cause to this population decline.  In the 1980s China, once the largest producer of bee products, lost all of its bee populations due to the use of harmful pesticides.  Ever since then they have relied on importing their products that bees once pollinated and the use of arduous and expensive hand pollinating.  It is estimated that if the United States were forced to hand pollinate the crops that the bee does it would cost approximately ninety billion dollars a year.  At the cost of avoiding that the United States agriculture industry has been importing vast quantities of bees in from Australia and other nations who, as of yet, have not experienced such a crisis among their bee populations.  But for how long will this method last?  Some experts believe that the United States is facing a disaster considered more urgent then global warming.

It is not just the Honey Bee that is disappearing, but in fact all pollinators.  Scientist have been working steadily on this case for a number of years now and have yet to find a concrete answer for the Colony Collapse Disorder epidemic.  Many believe that all the evidence is quite clear that the use of pesticides is the obvious cause for the bee devastation.  The United States alone uses approximately 800 million pounds of pesticides annually for agriculture.  And many of the pesticides used have shown to cause serious illness for the bee.  However, just as the bees are necessary to produce vast amounts of inexpensive food product, so are chemicals.  Some scientists also believe that bees may be suffering from some unknown type of virus, bacteria, or fungi.  Research will continue, but if a solution doesn’t evolve soon the Honey Bee and many other species of pollinators are expected to be headed for extinction.

One solution to this epidemic may be to attempt to restore wild bee populations.  However, until the use the large quantities of chemicals used in our industrialized society declines greatly, that may not be an effective option.  Many scientists are experimenting with genetically transforming the African Bee, a more aggressive and possibly resilient species, to be used (and undoubtedly exploited) by the agricultural industry.  But negative consequences are surely to arise with such an experiment.  Until the United States ways of production fundamentally change a quick and harmless solution is extremely unlikely.  We are once again faced with the choice of drastically changing our culture’s destructive way of living, or watching another of Mother Natures creatures disappear forever.  What choice will you contribute to?

 

Work Sited:

1.  The New York Times.  Honey Bees: A History by Tammy Horn.  April 11, 2008.

http://topics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/11/honey-bees-a-history/

2.  Colorado State University.  All About Honey Bees by Lynne Eley.

http://www.colostate.edu/Dept/CoopExt/4DMG/Pests/bees.htm

3.  PBS Nature.  Video: Silence of the Bees.  October 28, 2007

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/silence-of-the-bees/video-full-episode/251/

4.  Science Daily.  Wild Bees Can Be Effective Pollinators.  March 25, 2009.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090324131550.htm

5.  Mid-Atlantic Apiculture Research and Extension Consortium.  History of Bee Keeping in the

United States by Everett Oertel.  http://maarec.cas.psu.edu/bkCD/HBBiology/history.htm

 

Revision

After extending my research on the disappearance of honey bees in relation to the use of cell phones, I now understand that cell phone radiation may not be responsible for the bee epidemic.  However, the theory regarding the precautionary principle still exists, it may not be the cell phone that is responsible for this crisis, however, the chances that it is related to the human tampering with nature’s natural processes is quite certainly the case.

Popular Culture vs. Precautionary Principle

It is estimated that greater than 84% of Americans have cell phones.  Of that percentage, though, how many people realize the risks that cell phones pose on human health, the environment, and our bee populations?  Yes, the very existence of the Honey Bee.  It was becoming unavoidably apparent in the fall of 2006 that there was a serious problem with the Honey Bee.  Hives across the world were being abandoned and no one knew exactly why.  However, cell phone radiation is now taking the blame for this devastating disappearance.  It is believed that the radiation emitted by cell phones and other like technology distorts the bees natural navigation system disabling the insect from finding its way back to the hive, resulting in death for the individual.  It is hypothesized that within ten years we may be living without the Honey Bee in existence.  While this is another devastating loss in the part of Mother Nature, it may also be a danger for the world’s food supply.  Most of the crops rely on their pollination from the Bee.

When will we value life on Earth over the  popular culture’s desires?  When will we decide that witnessing approximately 100 extinctions every day is too many to tolerate?  Will we ever practice the precautionary principle?  Or instead, shall we let the greed of the popular culture determine the fate of life on Earth?  Who will make a stance for the bees and the other creatures and ecosystems destroyed by cell phones and their towers?  Will you toss your  cell phone and become another voice that demands this practice come to an end?  Or does your right to carry a cell phone dominate the right of the Honey Bee to live?

Sources:

1.  Treehugger.  Are Cell Phone Towers Honey Bees’ Next Big Threat?.  http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/08/phone-towers-are-honey-bees-next-big-threat-study-says.php

2. The Independent Nature.  Are Mobil Phones Wiping Out Our Bees?.  http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/are-mobile-phones-wiping-out-our-bees-444768.html

3.  Switched.  82% of Americans Own Cell Phones. http://www.switched.com/2007/11/14/82-of-americans-own-cell-phones/

An Old Movement in a New Era

It has become an unavoidable reality that the state of Planet Earth is in serious jeopardy.  The human species has exhibited massive amounts of destruction to Earth’s natural environment and it is now evident that with this destruction there will be dire consequences.  Today’s science is more advanced than ever before and its warnings are threatening.  If a halt on anthropogenic impact is not implemented immediately then it will not only be our non-human relatives that are at risk of extinction.  It seems as though, perhaps, humans have begun to understand that their actions are abusive and may need to be altered.  Inhabitants of the United States are most certainly some of the most environmentally destructive in the world.  Speaking from a position concerning only carbon dioxide, “the average American produces the same greenhouse-gas emissions as four and a half Mexicans, or eighteen Indians, or ninety-nine Bangladeshis.” (Kolbert, 155)  Yes, an arrogant nation America seems to be.  But, perhaps, the American people are capable of changing their ways.  And as we take a look back in history, this would not be the first time they have tried.

In our current year 2009 you do not have to look too far to notice changes in the way American minds are thinking in regards to the environment.  Although the United States is still littered with endless environmental atrocities, it is also increasingly evident that a decent portion of the population is beginning to develop a sense of respect for the natural world.  “Going green” is a very hot topic today and taking care of Mother Earth is now on the agenda for many people.  But, while this is a new and groovy topic for our most recent generations, this is far from an original idea as far as the American land and culture is concerned. Beginning in the 1960’s and working its way through the 1970’s, there was an environmental movement with similar arguments taking place.  Many Americans began to take a step back and reassess the industrialized world that they had just created.  With pollution inundating the air, the water, and the soil it became clear that there was an element out of place in the modern world.  But, similarly to today, this was not a topic that gained attention until the warning signs presented themselves in the expression of danger signs from Mother Nature.  In the 1960’s it took deadly smog pollution, lethal pesticide use, oil spills, constant species extinctions and toxic rivers to ignite in flames before the evidence was clear that our civilization had some flaws that needed immediate attention.

The environmental movement of the 1960’s and 1970’s truly began in 1962 with the publication of Rachel Carson’s book, Silent Spring.  Rachel Carson introduced the idea that our chemically abundant society had serious dangers associated with it.  After the publication of this book and others like it, the movement began to take off.  Protests were being exhibited across the nation and the practice of grassroots philosophies was taken up by individuals in both American cities and rural towns.  There was pressure for political change to initiate environmental protection and for industrialization to gain likewise concerns.  This movement had numerous great successes and made great strides towards environmental protection.  In the 1960’s and 1970’s the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Endangered Species Act were passed along with many more.  Organizations and funds were established including the World Wildlife Fund, the Environmental Defense Fund, and the Sierra Club.  It was during this movement, too, that the very first Earth Day was celebrated.  It seemed as though America was heading towards a more sustainable future, but the next generation had an influence on American culture and business that shifted the American people’s priorities drastically.

In 1980 when Ronald Reagan took office as the president of the United States the environmental movement of the 1960’s and 1970’s came to a political end.  As the 1980’s and the 1990’s passed big business and cheap oil became the principles of American culture.  Pollution discharged by large industry was capped and hidden and the environmental movement was quieted.  During this time period carbon dioxide and other emission took a drastic toll of the natural world and the raping of our forests, mountains, rivers, wetlands, and oceans devastated wildlife across the nation and the world.  It wasn’t until the nineties ended and the early 2000’s were among us that we began to see how severe our destruction had been and leading scientists warned us that we must change our ways if we’d like to hand over a habitable world to our children.

It is year 2009 and we are in the sixth mass extinction that Earth has known.  This extinction era is claiming 100 species every day and is the only extinction ever in history to be inflicted by anthropogenic causes.  We are currently in the midst of an environmental movement that is up against some incredibly powerful forces in the fight for life.  Unlike the movement of the 1960’s and 1970’s this movement holds the fate of our very existence.  And, with climate change as the most powerful weapon threatening our species, a weapon that has a greater than ten-year delay on it in response to our actions, it may already be too late.  Will we win the fight for life before it is too late?

 

Work Cited

1. Field Notes from a Catastrophe.  Elizabeth Kolbert.
2. Environmental Protection Agency.  The Spirit of the First Earth Day. http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/earthday/01.htm
3. Ecology Hall of Fame.  Environmental Movement Timeline. http://www.ecotopia.org/ehof/timeline.html

Topics

Topics of interest to me include those relating to our natural environment, ecology, and biodiversity.  I’m also interested in animal rights and animal behavior.  I have a passion for sustainability and forces of activism, the global unity of individuals in an effort to bring earth back to a healthy state.

Advice From an Industry

In the book In Defense of Food, Pollan tells us about the Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs and how they acted on dietary studies conducted by the American Heart Association.  We are told that “In January 1977, the committee issued a fairly straightforward set of dietary guidelines, calling on Americans to cut down on their consumption of red meat and dairy products.  Within weeks a firestorm of criticism, emanating chiefly from the red meat and dairy industries, engulfed the committee, and Senator McGovern (who had a great many cattle ranchers among his South Dakota constituents) was forced to beat a retreat.  The committee’s recommendations were hastily rewritten.  Plain talk about actual foodstuffs-the committee had advised Americans to ‘reduce consumption of meat’ –was replaced by artful compromise: ‘choose meats, poultry, and fish that will reduce saturated fat intake’”

I think it’s quite outrageous that there is a demand for organizations to provide us with dietary guidelines.  However, I think it is even more outrageous that the guidelines provided are severely influenced and altered by large industries and ultimately money.  The corruption that exists among organization-provided information to Americans and large corporations is terribly discomforting.  In this instance the Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs was bombarded by the meat and dairy industry.  Which is a terribly destructive and unethical business that I would hope no American would care to hear their advice on dietary consumption.

Factory farms are large industrial facilities used to raise farm animals as quickly and efficiently as possible to produce the maximum amount of food product with the least possible cost involved.  Factory farms produce most of the world’s animal food products.  The practice of factory farming began in the 1920’s when the role that vitamins play in an animal’s diet was understood.  When it was discovered that adding vitamin A and D to an animal’s food source could substitute the need for sunlight and active movement for the animal’s growth, this method of agribusiness began to take shape and spread worldwide.  However, as the practice of intensive livestock production increased, so did the prevalence of disease.  In the 1940’s, with the development of antibiotics, this problem was believed to be solved.  Since then, factory farms have been growing globally at an intense rate.  This form of agribusiness now provides for 74 percent of the world’s poultry, 43 percent of its beef, and 68 percent of its eggs.  With world-wide population now approaching seven billion, this is believed to be the only method to provide for hunger needs.  However, along with these possible benefits to industrial livestock production, there are also numerous drawbacks.

While factory farming may be a successful method of dealing with an ever-growing demand for food worldwide, it also has increasingly detrimental effects on our environment and most recently, alarming effects on global marine biology.  Water pollution is believed to be the most devastating effect of factory farming.  One serious problem that factory farms face is the elimination of animal waste.  In the United States alone, 1.4 billion tons of manure is produced each year by industrial livestock facilities, that is 130 times more waste then humans produce.  This manure is far more potent than human waste and also highly contaminated due to the antibiotics and hormones fed to food animals and the pesticides applied to the feces to manage insect problems.  Livestock waste contains many toxic substances including ammonia, methane, hydrogen sulfide, carbon monoxide, cyanide, phosphorous, nitrates and can also host over 100 microbial pathogens.  These substances in high concentrations in our ground water and running off into our waterways can be extremely dangerous to our natural world and its inhabitants. This high concentration of chemicals in waterways across the world is killing millions of fish and other aquatic life every year.  Our delicate underwater ecosystems are experiencing permanent damage leading to a massive devastation of underwater biology.  We are now observing large and frequent dead zones like never before and extinction rates are alarmingly high.  So, while factory farming may have certain advantages, the disadvantages strongly outweigh them.  Why then, would we even consider taking being persuaded by this industry?

I think Pollan makes many good points in Part One of In Defense of Food.  I also believe that while reading his book, as readers, we must consider more than just the concepts he provides us with.  As a vegan, I look forward to reading more about his advice on eating food, not too much, and mostly plants.  I wonder if along with his encouragement to eat more plants, perhaps, he’ll touch on the devastating effects of agribusiness to American land and biological diversity and the need for our culture not only to change the way we eat, but also the way we produce.

The Shift

I grew up in an abnormally non-argumentative household.  My home was not perfect by any means; however, it was a home where conflict and aggression was kept very quiet.  If a family member held any strong negative feelings, they would often times be transformed into passive aggressive behavior.  One would exercise means of persuasion to achieve individual desires in the household.

As a child I had very strong beliefs pertaining to our cultures destructive lifestyle and abuse of the planet we live on and its inhabitants.    My parents were my primary role models, though,  and as a result of their influence I would often keep a mindset towards these issues that was more passive then I was content with.  I would kept my feelings to myself.  As I grew into my teenage years and eventually out of my parents’ home my exposure and exploration towards confrontation began.  During this time period I allowed myself to feel the way that I feel about issues that are important to me openly with others and I eliminated my personal need to be overly passive and use only means of persuasion to express myself.

I now feel more at ease with my relationship towards argument and conflict and understand that it can be a very healthy part of human interaction.  I feel as though in order to be at peace with myself and accomplish all that I am capable of for the planet I love, I will have to constantly continue experimenting with confrontation.